PSY328H5 Lecture Notes - Lecture 9: Risk Assessment, Trait Theory, Psychopathy

91 views8 pages
14 Mar 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Plan for Today
Risk Assessment - fear that someone will do something again
Psychopathy
Big Five Trait Theory
Risk Assessment
“The process of identifying and studying hazards to reduce the probability of their
occurrence.”
How do we define violence?
Violence is not a standardized definition
Physical injury vs. psychological damage
Courts prefer physical injury because you can quantify that
Actual harm vs. intent
It doesn’t matter what the harm is, you look closer at the intent
Instrumental vs. reactive
Instrumental = silent aggression, predatory animal hunting for dinner, different
part of their brain reactive
Reactive = a reaction to something
Seeing your wife cheating and beating up the guy vs hiring a hitman to kill them
both. Difference between instrumental and reactive.
Sexual vs. non-sexual
Prediction in the Forensic Context
To predict is to make a statement about the likelihood of a future event or behaviour
Risk refers to a condition that exists as a function of the presence of
someone/something perceived as dangerous
Risk Assessment vs. Dangerousness
Dangerousness Risk Assessment
case by case empirical data
vague specific
stable trait acknowledges that violence changes over time
predicts violence tries to prevents violence
Violence tapers off as we get older
Risk assessment takes into account that violence changes over time
Risk Assessment
Identify persons likely to commit violence and develop interventions to reduce risk
Want to protect individuals but also give them their personal freedom
Predicting future behavior is extremely difficult (Fundamental Attribution Error)
Purpose of Risk Assessment
Why do we measure it?
Protect society and the person
To help inform decisions regarding:
Threat posed by an individual to others
Treatment options -intensity, modality, and targeting of treatment
Justice decisions (bail, detention, location for detention, LTO or DO applications)
Sentencing and dispositional planning
Supervision and case planning
Discharge from custody
Risk Markers
1. Gender - 90% of violent crime done by men - men are usually more violent than
women, gender gap in violence is closing, women more likely to mature over time,
women cant perpetrate violence in the same way
2. Age - age is inversely related to risk - as age goes up, risk goes down
3. Previous Antisocial and Criminal Behavior - past violence predicts future violence
4. Conditional release, parole and probation violation
5. Delinquency
6. Dysfunctional family environment - emotional abuse, unstable attachment, most
damage in high conflict divorces, high conflict marriages that stay together
Risk Markers
7. Physical and sexual abuse as a child - on-going trauma is the worst, majority of sexual
abuse in incest, family, friends, most goes unreported
8. Unemployment - especially for men, leads some people to believe life isn't fair
9. Lack of intimate relationships - individuals who suffer from some kind of antisocial
behaviour, people with relationships have something to lose
10. Mental illness – schizophrenia and mania - psychotic break has potential for danger
and violence
11. Substance Abuse - 3 main reasons why this is strongly associated with criminal
behaviour
1. More impulsive when under the influence, impairment to functioning
2. People who are drug addicted are involved in buying and selling drugs, likely to
get robbed, ripped off
3. Drugs are a lubricant for antisocial behaviour
12. Sexual deviance - the more deviance the person has doesn’t predict violence, just
strong predictors of more sexual deviance
13. Psychopathy - one of the most powerful risk factors, only a small percentage of the
population
Conduct Disorder
1. Aggression to people and animals - pattern of behaviour
2. Destruction of property
3. Deceitfulness or theft
4. Serious violations of rules
Onset before or after age 10
Mild, moderate or severe
3 or more of 15 symptoms in past 12 months - look at situational factors that might
contribute to it
Psychopathy
Continuous variable - Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist (PCL)
Based on personality traits more than observable behavior
Violence of psychopaths is distinguishable
1. Retribution and revenge violence - do not like to be wronged or get the short end of
the stick, do not seem to care about the consequences of their actions, maze task with
shock, don’t learn from their mistakes, most likely to commit the crime again
2. High density offenders - commit all types of crimes, don’t seem to stick to being one
type of offender, violence to everybody
3. Recidivate with highest frequency
Procedural Aspects of Risk Assessment
Importance of training and expertise
Best tool/method for your purpose
Utilization of multiple sources of information
Confirmation of the validity of information - people who take the test are good liars
Assessment Methods
Clinical prediction - clinicians who work with special populations, work in courts,
extensive expertise
Actuarial prediction - statistician
Structured clinical/professional judgment (often referred to as SPJ)
For each, we need to consider:
What, and how, relevant or “predictive” items are selected
• Interpretation
Clinical Prediction
This process involves a review of the info about a person – the clinician uses
experience and/or intuition to make a judgment about future risk
Have interview with them, all relevant information
Base rates - lacking
Using psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses as important factors
Rarely have follow-up experience -make their assessment and move along
Communication of risk:
specify the person being “a risk” or categorized…. “a low risk”, “moderate” etc
The combination rule for factors in unspecified
Permission to use idiosyncratic items
Better off to flip a coin and decide prediction of aggression
Actuarial Predictions
Higher success rates, above chance
Information is based on empirically derived data; variables are statistically
demonstrated to predict risk (e.g., violence, sexual violence) over a specified period of
time (e.g., 5 years, 10 years)
Objective method of combining data to make decisions - explicit, structured,
systematic
Statistical procedures used in development
Initially test large number of variables – demonstrated as important via research
or experience
Items that add to prediction are included (regression)
Can include clinically assessed variables
Commonly utilizes static risk factors only
Actuarial Approach
Designed to predict outcome
Approach employed by insurance companies
Likelihood of violence expressed as a relative probability
Compare offenders to other offenders
Large samples with normed data for interpretation
Risk categories
Percentile rankings
e.g., VRAG (violent risk assessment guide), SORAG, STATIC-99, ODARA
Much more useful, compares offenders to other offenders
Actuarial Approach
• Advantage
Objective, scientific
Affords constancy (reliability) and accuracy (validity)
Increasingly more accurate (Hilton, Harris, & Rice, 2006), continues to get better
• Disadvantage
Can be insensitive to change (e.g., dynamic variables)
Optimization can restrict generalization
Structured Clinical/Professional Judgment
Attempt to find middle ground
Moderates the statistical and clinical positions
Rationally developed:
Items chosen based on research (proven to be statistically robust in other
studies)
And, based on clinical experience
Items not empirically optimized (e.g., weighted), a lot of discretion
Research has demonstrated they can predict
Interpretation issue
Score adjustment
Types of Factors: Static
Static risk factors are generally unchangeable, historical factors
Criminal records, suspensions, abuse
Static risk factors are good predictors of long-term sexual recidivism
Find them in current instruments
Meta-analysis by Hanson & Bussière (1998)
e.g., # of prior sexual offences (r=.19)
Types of Factors: Dynamic
Dynamic factors are changeable/fluctuating, temporally proximate factors
Dynamic factors are candidates for monitoring and intervention efforts, but:
Insufficient research to date
Meta-analysis by Hanson & Bussière (1998)
e.g., anxiety (r=.04)
Types of Factors: Protective
Protective factors are static/dynamic factors that ameliorate the effects of risk factors
Work against risk factors that help protect you from violence
Statistically associated with lower levels of reoffending/more positive overall
adjustment
Hoge, Andrews, & Leschied (1996)
Positive peer relations
Good school achievement
Positive response to authority
Effective use of leisure time
Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier (1998, 2006)
Psychosis -huge issue when people go off their medication
Violence and Risk Assessment: Lecture 9
Wednesday, March 14, 2018
12:04 PM
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 8 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
Plan for Today
Risk Assessment - fear that someone will do something again
• Psychopathy
Big Five Trait Theory
Risk Assessment
“The process of identifying and studying hazards to reduce the probability of their
occurrence.”
How do we define violence?
Violence is not a standardized definition
Physical injury vs. psychological damage
Courts prefer physical injury because you can quantify that
Actual harm vs. intent
It doesn’t matter what the harm is, you look closer at the intent
Instrumental vs. reactive
Instrumental = silent aggression, predatory animal hunting for dinner, different
part of their brain reactive
Reactive = a reaction to something
Seeing your wife cheating and beating up the guy vs hiring a hitman to kill them
both. Difference between instrumental and reactive.
Sexual vs. non-sexual
Prediction in the Forensic Context
To predict is to make a statement about the likelihood of a future event or behaviour
Risk refers to a condition that exists as a function of the presence of
someone/something perceived as dangerous
Risk Assessment vs. Dangerousness
Dangerousness Risk Assessment
case by case empirical data
vague specific
stable trait acknowledges that violence changes over time
predicts violence tries to prevents violence
Violence tapers off as we get older
Risk assessment takes into account that violence changes over time
Risk Assessment
Identify persons likely to commit violence and develop interventions to reduce risk
Want to protect individuals but also give them their personal freedom
Predicting future behavior is extremely difficult (Fundamental Attribution Error)
Purpose of Risk Assessment
Why do we measure it?
Protect society and the person
To help inform decisions regarding:
Threat posed by an individual to others
Treatment options -intensity, modality, and targeting of treatment
Justice decisions (bail, detention, location for detention, LTO or DO applications)
Sentencing and dispositional planning
Supervision and case planning
Discharge from custody
Risk Markers
1. Gender - 90% of violent crime done by men - men are usually more violent than
women, gender gap in violence is closing, women more likely to mature over time,
women cant perpetrate violence in the same way
2. Age - age is inversely related to risk - as age goes up, risk goes down
3. Previous Antisocial and Criminal Behavior - past violence predicts future violence
4. Conditional release, parole and probation violation
5. Delinquency
6. Dysfunctional family environment - emotional abuse, unstable attachment, most
damage in high conflict divorces, high conflict marriages that stay together
Risk Markers
7. Physical and sexual abuse as a child - on-going trauma is the worst, majority of sexual
abuse in incest, family, friends, most goes unreported
8. Unemployment - especially for men, leads some people to believe life isn't fair
9. Lack of intimate relationships - individuals who suffer from some kind of antisocial
behaviour, people with relationships have something to lose
10. Mental illness – schizophrenia and mania - psychotic break has potential for danger
and violence
11. Substance Abuse - 3 main reasons why this is strongly associated with criminal
behaviour
1. More impulsive when under the influence, impairment to functioning
2. People who are drug addicted are involved in buying and selling drugs, likely to
get robbed, ripped off
3. Drugs are a lubricant for antisocial behaviour
12. Sexual deviance - the more deviance the person has doesn’t predict violence, just
strong predictors of more sexual deviance
13. Psychopathy - one of the most powerful risk factors, only a small percentage of the
population
Conduct Disorder
1. Aggression to people and animals - pattern of behaviour
2. Destruction of property
3. Deceitfulness or theft
4. Serious violations of rules
Onset before or after age 10
Mild, moderate or severe
3 or more of 15 symptoms in past 12 months - look at situational factors that might
contribute to it
Psychopathy
Continuous variable - Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist (PCL)
Based on personality traits more than observable behavior
Violence of psychopaths is distinguishable
1. Retribution and revenge violence - do not like to be wronged or get the short end of
the stick, do not seem to care about the consequences of their actions, maze task with
shock, don’t learn from their mistakes, most likely to commit the crime again
2. High density offenders - commit all types of crimes, don’t seem to stick to being one
type of offender, violence to everybody
3. Recidivate with highest frequency
Procedural Aspects of Risk Assessment
Importance of training and expertise
Best tool/method for your purpose
Utilization of multiple sources of information
Confirmation of the validity of information - people who take the test are good liars
Assessment Methods
Clinical prediction - clinicians who work with special populations, work in courts,
extensive expertise
Actuarial prediction - statistician
Structured clinical/professional judgment (often referred to as SPJ)
For each, we need to consider:
What, and how, relevant or “predictive” items are selected
• Interpretation
Clinical Prediction
This process involves a review of the info about a person – the clinician uses
experience and/or intuition to make a judgment about future risk
Have interview with them, all relevant information
Base rates - lacking
Using psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses as important factors
Rarely have follow-up experience -make their assessment and move along
Communication of risk:
specify the person being “a risk” or categorized…. “a low risk”, “moderate” etc
The combination rule for factors in unspecified
Permission to use idiosyncratic items
Better off to flip a coin and decide prediction of aggression
Actuarial Predictions
Higher success rates, above chance
Information is based on empirically derived data; variables are statistically
demonstrated to predict risk (e.g., violence, sexual violence) over a specified period of
time (e.g., 5 years, 10 years)
Objective method of combining data to make decisions - explicit, structured,
systematic
Statistical procedures used in development
Initially test large number of variables – demonstrated as important via research
or experience
Items that add to prediction are included (regression)
Can include clinically assessed variables
Commonly utilizes static risk factors only
Actuarial Approach
Designed to predict outcome
Approach employed by insurance companies
Likelihood of violence expressed as a relative probability
Compare offenders to other offenders
Large samples with normed data for interpretation
Risk categories
Percentile rankings
e.g., VRAG (violent risk assessment guide), SORAG, STATIC-99, ODARA
Much more useful, compares offenders to other offenders
Actuarial Approach
• Advantage
Objective, scientific
Affords constancy (reliability) and accuracy (validity)
Increasingly more accurate (Hilton, Harris, & Rice, 2006), continues to get better
• Disadvantage
Can be insensitive to change (e.g., dynamic variables)
Optimization can restrict generalization
Structured Clinical/Professional Judgment
Attempt to find middle ground
Moderates the statistical and clinical positions
Rationally developed:
Items chosen based on research (proven to be statistically robust in other
studies)
And, based on clinical experience
Items not empirically optimized (e.g., weighted), a lot of discretion
Research has demonstrated they can predict
Interpretation issue
Score adjustment
Types of Factors: Static
Static risk factors are generally unchangeable, historical factors
Criminal records, suspensions, abuse
Static risk factors are good predictors of long-term sexual recidivism
Find them in current instruments
Meta-analysis by Hanson & Bussière (1998)
e.g., # of prior sexual offences (r=.19)
Types of Factors: Dynamic
Dynamic factors are changeable/fluctuating, temporally proximate factors
Dynamic factors are candidates for monitoring and intervention efforts, but:
Insufficient research to date
Meta-analysis by Hanson & Bussière (1998)
e.g., anxiety (r=.04)
Types of Factors: Protective
Protective factors are static/dynamic factors that ameliorate the effects of risk factors
Work against risk factors that help protect you from violence
Statistically associated with lower levels of reoffending/more positive overall
adjustment
Hoge, Andrews, & Leschied (1996)
Positive peer relations
Good school achievement
Positive response to authority
Effective use of leisure time
Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier (1998, 2006)
Psychosis -huge issue when people go off their medication
Violence and Risk Assessment: Lecture 9
Wednesday, March 14, 2018 12:04 PM
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 8 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in
Plan for Today
Risk Assessment - fear that someone will do something again
• Psychopathy
Big Five Trait Theory
Risk Assessment
“The process of identifying and studying hazards to reduce the probability of their
occurrence.”
How do we define violence?
Violence is not a standardized definition
Physical injury vs. psychological damage
Courts prefer physical injury because you can quantify that
Actual harm vs. intent
It doesn’t matter what the harm is, you look closer at the intent
Instrumental vs. reactive
Instrumental = silent aggression, predatory animal hunting for dinner, different
part of their brain reactive
Reactive = a reaction to something
Seeing your wife cheating and beating up the guy vs hiring a hitman to kill them
both. Difference between instrumental and reactive.
Sexual vs. non-sexual
Prediction in the Forensic Context
To predict is to make a statement about the likelihood of a future event or behaviour
Risk refers to a condition that exists as a function of the presence of
someone/something perceived as dangerous
Risk Assessment vs. Dangerousness
Dangerousness Risk Assessment
case by case empirical data
vague specific
stable trait acknowledges that violence changes over time
predicts violence tries to prevents violence
Violence tapers off as we get older
Risk assessment takes into account that violence changes over time
Risk Assessment
Identify persons likely to commit violence and develop interventions to reduce risk
Want to protect individuals but also give them their personal freedom
Predicting future behavior is extremely difficult (Fundamental Attribution Error)
Purpose of Risk Assessment
Why do we measure it?
Protect society and the person
To help inform decisions regarding:
Threat posed by an individual to others
Treatment options -intensity, modality, and targeting of treatment
Justice decisions (bail, detention, location for detention, LTO or DO applications)
Sentencing and dispositional planning
Supervision and case planning
Discharge from custody
Risk Markers
1.
Gender - 90% of violent crime done by men - men are usually more violent than
women, gender gap in violence is closing, women more likely to mature over time,
women cant perpetrate violence in the same way
2.
Age - age is inversely related to risk - as age goes up, risk goes down
3.
Previous Antisocial and Criminal Behavior - past violence predicts future violence
4.
Conditional release, parole and probation violation
5.
Delinquency
6.
Dysfunctional family environment - emotional abuse, unstable attachment, most
damage in high conflict divorces, high conflict marriages that stay together
Risk Markers
7.
Physical and sexual abuse as a child - on-going trauma is the worst, majority of sexual
abuse in incest, family, friends, most goes unreported
8.
Unemployment - especially for men, leads some people to believe life isn't fair
9.
Lack of intimate relationships - individuals who suffer from some kind of antisocial
behaviour, people with relationships have something to lose
10.
Mental illness – schizophrenia and mania - psychotic break has potential for danger
and violence
11.
Substance Abuse - 3 main reasons why this is strongly associated with criminal
behaviour
1.
More impulsive when under the influence, impairment to functioning
2.
People who are drug addicted are involved in buying and selling drugs, likely to
get robbed, ripped off
3. Drugs are a lubricant for antisocial behaviour
12. Sexual deviance - the more deviance the person has doesn’t predict violence, just
strong predictors of more sexual deviance
13. Psychopathy - one of the most powerful risk factors, only a small percentage of the
population
Conduct Disorder
1. Aggression to people and animals - pattern of behaviour
2. Destruction of property
3. Deceitfulness or theft
4. Serious violations of rules
Onset before or after age 10
Mild, moderate or severe
3 or more of 15 symptoms in past 12 months - look at situational factors that might
contribute to it
Psychopathy
Continuous variable - Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist (PCL)
Based on personality traits more than observable behavior
Violence of psychopaths is distinguishable
1. Retribution and revenge violence - do not like to be wronged or get the short end of
the stick, do not seem to care about the consequences of their actions, maze task with
shock, don’t learn from their mistakes, most likely to commit the crime again
2. High density offenders - commit all types of crimes, don’t seem to stick to being one
type of offender, violence to everybody
3. Recidivate with highest frequency
Procedural Aspects of Risk Assessment
Importance of training and expertise
Best tool/method for your purpose
Utilization of multiple sources of information
Confirmation of the validity of information - people who take the test are good liars
Assessment Methods
Clinical prediction - clinicians who work with special populations, work in courts,
extensive expertise
Actuarial prediction - statistician
Structured clinical/professional judgment (often referred to as SPJ)
For each, we need to consider:
What, and how, relevant or “predictive” items are selected
• Interpretation
Clinical Prediction
This process involves a review of the info about a person – the clinician uses
experience and/or intuition to make a judgment about future risk
Have interview with them, all relevant information
Base rates - lacking
Using psychiatric symptoms and diagnoses as important factors
Rarely have follow-up experience -make their assessment and move along
Communication of risk:
specify the person being “a risk” or categorized…. “a low risk”, “moderate” etc
The combination rule for factors in unspecified
Permission to use idiosyncratic items
Better off to flip a coin and decide prediction of aggression
Actuarial Predictions
Higher success rates, above chance
Information is based on empirically derived data; variables are statistically
demonstrated to predict risk (e.g., violence, sexual violence) over a specified period of
time (e.g., 5 years, 10 years)
Objective method of combining data to make decisions - explicit, structured,
systematic
Statistical procedures used in development
Initially test large number of variables – demonstrated as important via research
or experience
Items that add to prediction are included (regression)
Can include clinically assessed variables
Commonly utilizes static risk factors only
Actuarial Approach
Designed to predict outcome
Approach employed by insurance companies
Likelihood of violence expressed as a relative probability
Compare offenders to other offenders
Large samples with normed data for interpretation
Risk categories
Percentile rankings
e.g., VRAG (violent risk assessment guide), SORAG, STATIC-99, ODARA
Much more useful, compares offenders to other offenders
Actuarial Approach
• Advantage
Objective, scientific
Affords constancy (reliability) and accuracy (validity)
Increasingly more accurate (Hilton, Harris, & Rice, 2006), continues to get better
• Disadvantage
Can be insensitive to change (e.g., dynamic variables)
Optimization can restrict generalization
Structured Clinical/Professional Judgment
Attempt to find middle ground
Moderates the statistical and clinical positions
Rationally developed:
Items chosen based on research (proven to be statistically robust in other
studies)
And, based on clinical experience
Items not empirically optimized (e.g., weighted), a lot of discretion
Research has demonstrated they can predict
Interpretation issue
Score adjustment
Types of Factors: Static
Static risk factors are generally unchangeable, historical factors
Criminal records, suspensions, abuse
Static risk factors are good predictors of long-term sexual recidivism
Find them in current instruments
Meta-analysis by Hanson & Bussière (1998)
e.g., # of prior sexual offences (r=.19)
Types of Factors: Dynamic
Dynamic factors are changeable/fluctuating, temporally proximate factors
Dynamic factors are candidates for monitoring and intervention efforts, but:
Insufficient research to date
Meta-analysis by Hanson & Bussière (1998)
e.g., anxiety (r=.04)
Types of Factors: Protective
Protective factors are static/dynamic factors that ameliorate the effects of risk factors
Work against risk factors that help protect you from violence
Statistically associated with lower levels of reoffending/more positive overall
adjustment
Hoge, Andrews, & Leschied (1996)
Positive peer relations
Good school achievement
Positive response to authority
Effective use of leisure time
Quinsey, Harris, Rice, & Cormier (1998, 2006)
Psychosis -huge issue when people go off their medication
Violence and Risk Assessment: Lecture 9
Wednesday, March 14, 2018 12:04 PM
Unlock document

This preview shows pages 1-3 of the document.
Unlock all 8 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Get access

Grade+
$10 USD/m
Billed $120 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
40 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class
Class+
$8 USD/m
Billed $96 USD annually
Homework Help
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
30 Verified Answers
Study Guides
1 Booster Class